Gulf Of Thailand Won't Rise With Global Warming, Expert Claims

[BangkokJazz]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

[teatree]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

He posts links to discredited sites like 'realclimate' (run one of the very scientists caught red handed in the climategate scandal) and sourcewatch (run by a group partisan environmentalists trying desperately to appear neutral).

We all know the 'party line'. Its encouraging that more and more people are now starting to look at alternative views on the subject and are starting to think for themselves.

[Orac]

I am not entirely sure about your arguement above JRT as it seems to imply that a reduction in energy consumption, and therefore potentially pollutants/greenhouse gases, has already been significantly acheived through technological development which is still going on. Are you now saying that this problem could go away on its own?

Not really..........CO2 and fossil fuel energy consumption is on the rise. Both will continue to rise as the human population increases. Given that it would be totally inhumane to leave billions of people wallowing in extreme poverty, energy consumption must increase to pull them out of poverty.

Given present fossil fuel technologies, that is, of course, problematic because of the release of CO2.

Many people (e.g., Al Gore) is saying we have all the technologies we need to "solve the global warming problem." He is right, but what I am saying is that if we are going to make a transition from fossil fuels, why not go all the way?

Why not attempt to skip over the transitional energy systems and develop something that will truly improve the quality of life for all and solve our environmental problems. I want to see personal energy systems.........localized........decentralized..........something the Energy Mafia can't control.

You have your own toaster, oven, refrigerator, car, motorcycle, boat, washing machine, computer, etc.........WHY NOT HAVE YOUR OWN ENERGY DEVICE?

If you say we can't do it........we can't do it. I am trying to point out that in the past we often said we can do it..........and did it (e.g., going to the moon). There are many examples. And no doubt we can develop a personal energy system that is safe and environmentally sound, and (important) inexpensive.

We will do this one way or another at some point during the 21st century.........we should do it now.

This will lower the cost of everything.........it will allow us to work less.........it will solve our environmental problems........it will create too many jobs to count.

The supporters of the Energy Mafia will say it will cost us a fortune. What is costing us a fortune is continuing down a destructive path. Acting irresponsibly to future generations is costing us in terms of military spending (1 trillion per year thrown away on that)........it is costing us in terms of environmental pollution and health.......it is setting up a situation that will lead to future generations having to spend, spend and spend some more to address the costly mistakes we are making now.

Here is an idea: Stop all income taxes.......not more taxes on work. Introduce a carbon tax and shift some of our military spending to a global R&D project to develop a personal energy system.

We can do it. You just have to demand it and make sure politicians focus on it (along with population reduction).

I must say that I agree with you here and that technology should be something that is on the table and suitably funded especially in view of the consequences IF global warming exists be it man made or otherwise. One thing that could be done by the international community, as well as finding the money to fund this, could be to remove patents/copyrights from technologies that may prove useful in finding a solution.

Since you view that a technological solution may be possible to solve the energy issue, I would be interested in knowing your thoughts regarding geoengineering to find a solution to climate change as there still appears to be a great deal of conflicting thought on this. I have added a few links below which argue both sides of this though I am sure you can direct me to more like these:

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/11/02/02...ring&st=cse

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/envi...icle6879251.ece

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archi...comment-page-7/

[JR Texas]

To Orac, BangkokJazz and Animatic........THANKS FOR THE POSTS.

About geoengineering........I am not that familiar with it. But I did read about it.

The first thing that came to my mind was a question: Why do that?

It involves taking a big risk. Too many unknowns.

It seems to me a simpler solution is to plant trees.........and lots of them.

We might also stop the massive amount of deforestation that is happening, especially in the developed world (even in Thailand......look at how most of the people make charcoal).

And, of course, we can radically reduce CO2 emissions through technological means (e.g., carbon sequestration).

But I think we should seriously think about skipping over all of this........we need to think about what we really want and need in terms of energy.........what would be appropriate for the 21st century and beyond.........and how energy might act as a catalyst for positive change.

The energy system I am thinking about is a catalyst for positive change.......economic, environmental, population, social. It will literally transform everything.....including us......we will evolve and become better than we are now.

Call me a dreamer.......I don't care......in fact, that is a compliment from where I stand.

[RickBradford]

Professor Aynsley Kellow, who worked on the last IPCC report, has been looking closely at Climategate and doesn't like what he sees,

...the manipulation of the analysis was "in many ways worse than many of us expected when we knew about this case from the outside without access to these kinds of exchanges''.

"What you have is evidence of a quite clear willingness to manipulate raw data to suit predetermined results, you've got a resistance to any notion of transparency, an active resistance to freedom of information requests or quite reasonable requests from scientists to have a look at data so that it can be verified,'' Professor Kellow said.

He listed the malpractices as evidence of attempts to subvert the peer-review process, evidence of pressure being placed on editors to reject dissident views on climate science, and then attempts by the lead authors in the IPCC report to keep any opposing peer-reviewed science that has managed to get into the literature out of the IPCC report and, ultimately, ensuring it doesn't find its way into the all-important summary for policy makers, which, he said, was about all the politicians and bureaucrats read.

The policy makers are now convinced, according to Professor Kellow, that earth's climate system is like a kind of thermostat in which we can dial in a particular level of CO2 and get a two-degree temperature rise over the next 100 years.

Politicised scientists and unscientific politicians -- a very dangerous mix.

[Jingthing]

Prof Kellow is a government expert, not a climate expert.

[RickBradford]

Prof Kellow is a government expert, not a climate expert

He's not commenting on the science for the most part - he's commenting on the process by which results are arrived at and presented.

And he was highly regarded enough in this area to have been an expert reviewer for the IPCC's fourth report.

Edited December 13, 2009 by RickBradford

[catmac]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

The only thing "tedious" about JR's links is that he posts the same ones page after page ad infinitum!

I applaud his enthusiasm (however misguided it may be), and would never accuse him of being a "paid lackey" of the Warmers. Pity the Warmers can't stop throwing that allegation at those here who oppose them, reminds me of how some Yellows used to accuse anybody who didn't subscribe to the view that Thaksin was the devil incarnate of being in the pay of some shady Hong Kong based PR firm!

Perhaps JR would gain more respect if he were to answer some of the valid doubts raised here, and not reply to them with his usual "cut-and-paste" torrent of links.

[BEENTHEREDONETHAT]

For a point of view you may not have considered read "State Of Fear" by Michael Crichton published in 2005. In my opinion nothing has changed and his points (with references) are still valid. Besides that it is a interesting read.

[animatic]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

The corollary being:

"You can take a horses ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

[RickBradford]

"You can take a horses ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think

While I disagree with almost everything JR says, I don't think calling him a horse's ass if very helpful or dignified.

Roy Pielke, Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Colorado, is a noted AGW supporter and even he is disgusted by Climategate.

"Human-caused climate change is real, and I'm a strong advocate for action,' he said. 'But I'm also a strong advocate for integrity in science.

"These emails open up the possibility that big scientific questions we've regarded as settled may need another look.

"They reveal that some of these scientists saw themselves not as neutral investigators but as warriors engaged in battle with the so-called sceptics.

"They have lost a lot of credibility and as far as their being leading spokespeople on this issue of huge public importance, there is no going back.'

[JR Texas]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

The corollary being:

"You can take a horses ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

Absolutely true! Here is some more stuff to think about (be sure to check out George Carlin...it is relevant somehow):

Small island nations call global warming suicide

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/small-is...warming-suicide

MafiaBusters.com » GEORGE CARLIN - Putting Consumers in Control of the Marketplace

http://www.mafiabusters.com/?page_id=23

(see what George Carlin said about those who control us all……like the men and women who stand at the top of the ENERGY MAFIA)

AND DON’T FORGET THIS:

Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climate-skepti...ies-exxonmobil/

Transition from oil to renewable energy 100 years away, says Exxon Mobil

Oil giant claims ‘no viable alternatives’ will emerge in the next century.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/st...ays-exxon-mobil

Civil Conspiracy Lawsuits Filed Against Climate Change Deniers

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091206/civi...-change-deniers

Groundbreaking Lawsuit Accuses Big Oil of Conspiracy to Deceive Public About Climate Change

Source: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/3/groun...uses_big_oil_of

Climate change sceptics and lobbyists put world at risk, says top adviser

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009...cientist-watson

THEY SHOULD BE PUT ON TRIAL AT THE HAGUE FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY…AND IN THE FUTURE WHEY WILL BE PUT ON TRIAL. THE COURTS ARE ALREADY TURNING AGAINST THEM

One final item.......this is what is at stake:

Scientists really don't want that to turn into this:

Because of this:

[Jingthing]

Thank you JR. Keep up the good fight. I don't think we will win because I think our species has proven itself to be suicidal. Oh well ...

[Orac]

JR is passitonate about the subject and supports his arguments with data and links. I can understand why that would be "tedious" to some. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

The only thing "tedious" about JR's links is that he posts the same ones page after page ad infinitum!

I applaud his enthusiasm (however misguided it may be), and would never accuse him of being a "paid lackey" of the Warmers. Pity the Warmers can't stop throwing that allegation at those here who oppose them, reminds me of how some Yellows used to accuse anybody who didn't subscribe to the view that Thaksin was the devil incarnate of being in the pay of some shady Hong Kong based PR firm!

Perhaps JR would gain more respect if he were to answer some of the valid doubts raised here, and not reply to them with his usual "cut-and-paste" torrent of links.

To be fair, JR has done that for the last two questions I have asked him, the first of which I have to admit was meant sarcastically but I was given a fairly comprehensive answer to. Respect where it is due.

[Jingthing]

Have you denial artists read this?

Associated Press reports

E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../i045626S28.DTL

Edited December 13, 2009 by Jingthing

[Orac]

Have you denial artists read this?

Associated Press reports

E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../i045626S28.DTL

To be honest JT for every report that says they are harmless there is another one that says they are not. One point that does concern me though is when I see the term 'stolen' used for documents that should have been in the public domain and subject to the freedom of information act anyway which sounds to me like a cover up.

[RickBradford]

Have you Warmist artists read this?

According to his [briffa's] tree rings, the period since 1960 had not seen a steep rise in temperature, as actual temperature readings showed - but a large and steady decline, so calling into question the accuracy of the earlier data derived from tree rings.

This is the context in which, seven weeks later, Jones presented his 'trick' - as simple as it was deceptive.

All he had to do was cut off Briffa's inconvenient data at the point where the decline started, in 1961, and replace it with actual temperature readings, which showed an increase.

This 'exhaustive review' by the UK's Daily Mail comes to the conclusion that data were faked.

I don't say my respect for the Daily Mail is very high, but my respect for Associated Press has taken a "large and steady decline."

[JR Texas]

Stealing private emails is THEFT. It is illegal. The people who committed the crime, should they be caught, will go to jail.

The scientific data--most of it--has been available to the public for a very long time.

Jingting is right........they show nothing but an honest appraisal of the flat earth psychos.

Top UN scientist: What Climategate? - COP15 United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen 2009

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2888

It is worth pointing out again.....but the point keeps getting ignored........that there are several research groups that monitor the earth's temperature, in different parts of the world.........and all of the separate databases agree with each other.

So, even if one scientists is showing predictable anger at the flat earth psychos, that does not mean he or she manipulated the database. That obviously did not happen.

If I were writing emails about them, I would not have anything good to say about them.

They are not scientists........they are thought assassins.......character assassins........spin mongers........they deceive, lie, distort facts and think nothing of it. Apparently they think theft is fine.

The courts are turning against them just like the courts turned against the tobacco companies and their lobbyists many years ago.

Civil Conspiracy Lawsuits Filed Against Climate Change Deniers | SolveClimate.com

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091206/civi...-change-deniers

Oh........look at this:

First decade of 21st-century warmest on record | Radio Netherlands Worldwide

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/first-de...-warmest-record

And this:

What could be causing the glaciers to melt? I suppose the flat earth BOLs think it is corrupt scientists with blow torches, melting the glaciers all over the planet in order to give the impression that global warming is real so that........so that........huummmmm.......BIG GOVERNMENT can be created.

Actually, some of them probably think that is true

[tig28]

Business Standard --- Sunday, Dec 13, 2009 ---- (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/tuvalu-envoy-makes-tearful-appeal-calls-for-strong-agreement/80642/on)

Tuvalu envoy makes tearful appeal; calls for strong agreement

Betwa Sharma/PTI / Copenhagen December 12, 2009, 17:39 IST

The chief climate change negotiator of the tiny Pacific island of Tuvalu today made an emotional appeal for a strong agreement that would legally bind all countries to commitments to control carbon emissions.

Speaking in the main hall of the Bella Centre where the Copenhagen climate change summit is being held, Tuvalu's representative Ian Fry called for two legally binding pacts. "I woke up this morning crying, and that's not easy for a grown man to admit," Fry said, choking as he spoke in the plenary crowded with hundreds of delegates who clapped to show their support. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," he said.

Tuvalu is a small island where people live two meters above sea level and it could be swamped by rising sea levels. Since the beginning of the conference, Fry tabled a proposal that calls for vigorous action on developed countries and emerging economies such as binding cuts and puts 1.5 degree limit in warming.

A Report from :The Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/)

TUVALU

(lat. 8.0S, long. 178.0E)

Tuvalu (formerly Ellice Islands) is a group of islands in the Pacific Ocean with a highest point about 5 metres above sea level. It is often claimed, by locals and residents of distant countries, that these islands are suffering from rising sea level due to global warming.

This page presents graphs of sea level at Funafuti (or Fongafale), one of the major islands of the group. The data used here is the monthly values of the 1985-2001 Revised Local Reference data from the Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (see here), where the Funafuti dataset has reference number 732/011. (The data prior to 1985 has gaps in it and has been rejected.)

These graphs show that high seas in March are a normal occurrence and that the local sea level falls under the influence of strong El Nino conditions then rises when those conditions disappear.

There is no evidence of permanently rising seas that can be matched to the supposed increase in average global temperature since 1976.

SUMMARY

There is no indication from this data that Tuvalu is suffering from the sea level rising due to global warming. The overwhelming conclusion is that the cessation of strong El Nino conditions will simply cause the sea level to rise back to its normal position.

--- for further information including graphs view : http://mclean.ch/climate/Sea_Level_Tuvalu.htm

[Jingthing]

The source of above, clearly denial artists with a predetermined agenda --

Who are we, and why?

The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition was formed in April 2006 by a group of New Zealanders, mostly resident here but some overseas, who are concerned at the misleading information being disseminated about climate change and so-called anthropogenic (man-made) global warming.

[tig28]

The source of above, clearly denial artists with a predetermined agenda --

Hi Jingthing

--- normally you are with the program somewhat -- but in this case you are so far off the mark as to be laughable ---

The Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (POL) are so far from being (as you so boldly state) "denial artists with a predetermined agenda" as to make a mockery of all you write.

What is the deal here ??? Anyone or anything that disagrees with your thoughts are involved in some sort of conspiracy to trick Jingthing and the world ???

There was a reason I attached a link to The POL in my post -- so anyone who was interested could establish just who they were --- prior to sprouting absolute rubbish. I certainly missed the boat here !!!

For those who just can't bother here's a few hints :

The Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory is based in Brownlow Street, Liverpool, England. Its scientific research focuses on oceanography encompassing global sea-levels and geodesy, numerical modelling of continental shelf seas and coastal sediment processes. This research alongside activities of surveying, monitoring, data management and forecasting provides strategic support for the wider mission of the Natural Environment Research Council.

POL is a leading world centre in tidal prediction (with related interests in earth tides and storm surges) and a leading European centre in modelling and forecasting shelf sea dynamics.

POL is home to the Coastal Observatory in Liverpool Bay, the National Tidal and Sea Level Facility and the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level.

According to The British Oceanographic Data Centre:

"POL is a world-leading centre in tidal and storm surge prediction and is a leading European centre in modelling and forecasting coastal water environments. POL scientists are experts in sea level rise — predicted to increase substantially this century.

As a major research centre of the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), POL conducts world-class research in

• estuary, coastal and shelf sea circulation & ecosystem dynamics
  
• wind-wave dynamics & sediment transport
  
• global sea level and geodetic oceanography
  
• marine technology & operational oceanography
  

POL is one of seven UK marine centres that are participating in the NERC Oceans 2025 programme. This is a strategic marine research programme which aims to improve understanding of ocean behaviour, response to climate change and subsequent impacts on society through cross-disciplinary partnership research. POL is undertaking research in six of the nine science themes that Oceans 2025 addresses

• Theme 1: Geodetic Oceanography, Polar Oceanography, and Sea Level
  
• Theme 3: Shelf and Coastal Processes
  
• Theme 6: Climatological Trends in the Physical Environment
  
• Theme 8: Technology Development
  
• Theme 9: Next Generation Ocean Prediction Systems
  
• Theme 10: Integration of Sustained Observations in the Marine Environment
  

In addition to this, ongoing research is carried out by POL scientists through a Coastal Observatory located in Liverpool Bay. The main objective is to understand a coastal sea's response both to natural forcing and to the consequences of human activity.

Complementing their own research, POL acts as a host institution to two internationally respected marine facilities: the National Tidal and Sea Level Facility and Tide Gauge Network (NTSLF), and the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL). "

Now Jingthing ----- This is the POL who quite clearly stated:

"There is no evidence of permanently rising seas that can be matched to the supposed increase in average global temperature since 1976."

They are totally unbiased and probably the worlds leading authority on these matters. Maybe even you should concider their research and conclusions before getting all misty-eyed over something like this:

The chief climate change negotiator of the tiny Pacific island of Tuvalu today made an emotional appeal for a strong agreement that would legally bind all countries to commitments to control carbon emissions.

Speaking in the main hall of the Bella Centre where the Copenhagen climate change summit is being held, Tuvalu's representative Ian Fry called for two legally binding pacts. "I woke up this morning crying, and that's not easy for a grown man to admit," Fry said, choking as he spoke in the plenary crowded with hundreds of delegates who clapped to show their support. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," he said.

Not much sign of "BIG OIL" --- but plenty for BIG MONEY.

[animatic]

"You can take a horses ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think

While I disagree with almost everything JR says, I don't think calling him a horse's ass if very helpful or dignified.

Roy Pielke, Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Colorado, is a noted AGW supporter and even he is disgusted by Climategate.

"Human-caused climate change is real, and I'm a strong advocate for action,' he said. 'But I'm also a strong advocate for integrity in science.

"These emails open up the possibility that big scientific questions we've regarded as settled may need another look.

"They reveal that some of these scientists saw themselves not as neutral investigators but as warriors engaged in battle with the so-called sceptics.

"They have lost a lot of credibility and as far as their being leading spokespeople on this issue of huge public importance, there is no going back.'

But I DIDN'T call JRTexas a horses ass.

No, that comment was universally applied, to loud mouths everywhere,

who can see facts before their eyes and still can't come to logical conclusion.

But want to hector opposing voices into silence.

Climate gate is one lone think tank being stupid in private, that got leaked,

it has sod all to do with all the OTHER think tanks doing their cogitating

in a logical, scientific manner, without being leveraged or compomised

by Big Energy to twist the story for extended profits.

[JR Texas]

I think there is a horses ass.........and he is apparently confused (and we both know who that is........it isn't you and it isn't me.......it is RB)

Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climate-skepti...ies-exxonmobil/

A group promoting skepticism over widely-accredited climate change science has a web of connections to influential oil giant Exxon-Mobil, Raw Story has found.

The organization is called the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), apparently named after the UN coalition International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). An investigation into the group reveals its numerous links to Exxon-Mobil, a vehement opponent of climate legislation andnotorious among scientists for funding global warming skeptics.

"Exxon-Mobil essentially funds people to lie," Joseph Romm,lauded climate expert and author of the blog Climate Progress, told Raw Story. "It's important for people to understand that they pay off the overwhelming majority of groups in the area of junk science."

The NIPCC's signature report, "Climate Change Reconsidered," disputes the notion that global warming is human-caused, insisting in its policy summary that "Nature, not human activity, rules the planet." Many of its assertions have been challenged by, among others, the scientists' blogRealClimate.

The report was released and promoted this summer by the Heartland Institute, a think tank thatclaims to support "common-sense environmentalism" as opposed to "more extreme environmental activism." It alleges that "Global warming is a prime example of the alarmism that characterizes much of the environmental movement."

Story continues below...

________________________________________

"To call global warming a hoax is to question every scientific journal, every scientific academy, and buy into the most extreme conspiracy theories," Romm said.

Heartland has received at least $676,500 from Exxon-Mobil since 1998, the year Exxon launched a campaign to oppose the Kyoto Treaty, according to official documents of the two groups that have been compiled and reproduced by the website ExxonSecrets.org. Also, the institute's self-describedGovernment Relations Adviser Walter F. Buchholtz has been a lobbyist for Exxon-Mobil, theWashington Post reported in 2004.

The study's two principal authors and NIPCC leaders S Fred Singer and Craig D Idso are both associated with various organizations that have gotten generous funding from Exxon-Mobil.

Singer has researched and published for the Cato Institute, which has accepted $125,000 in grants from Exxon-Mobil since 1998. Other professional affiliations include the National Center for Policy Analysis, Frontiers of Freedom, and American Council on Science and Health -- which have accepted contributions of $540,000, $1.27 million and $150,000, respectively, from Exxon.

Although some praise him as a hero, Singer has been slammed by many fellow climate scientists as "a fraud, a charlatan and a showman" for his unorthodox views and research.

His co-author Idso is founder, board chairman and former president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, whose mission statement is to "separate reality from rhetoric in the emotionally-charged debate that swirls around the subject of carbon dioxide and global change." The organization has taken $100,000 in funding from Exxon since 1998, according to the oil company's reports.

Idso is also affiliated with the George Marshall Institute, which has reportedly won $840,000 from Exxon.

Exxon-Mobil has spent more money lobbying Congress in the last two years than any enterprise other than the Chamber of Commerce, dishing out $29 million in 2008 and over $20 million so far in 2009 to legislators. It's among the top 10 biggest spenders of lobbying cash since 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

"Exxon has waged certainly the biggest, most concerted, and most extreme disinformation campaign on this issue," Romm told Raw Story. "The trouble is they don't have to win the argument -- all they have to do is blow smoke and cast doubt, and they've accomplished their end."

In a recent incident, hackers exposed private emails exchanged between climate scientists. Somesaid the revealed information didn't add up to a conspiracy, while others declared it definitive proof that anthropogenic global warming is made-up.

The Senate will soon take up the mantle on climate bill that the House narrowly passed this summer, and a heated debate is likely to occur in Congress over the nature of the threat and the type of action that needs to be taken.

"I think we're going to pass it, but it's going to be an epic struggle," Romm said.

Republican Sen. Orrin Harch has referenced the NIPCC report, calling it a "Comprehensive scientific answer to the IPCC [sic] Reports." Various blogs, such the conservative Free Republic, have touted this report as evidence that "global warming is not a crisis, and never was."

[Orac]

JR, you forgot to include the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction in your list of organisations that received funding from Exxon-Mobil.

[JR Texas]

JR, you forgot to include the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction in your list of organisations that received funding from Exxon-Mobil.

If that is true--and BIG OIL does often play both sides of the fence--is clear that the scientists are not being influenced by money. That is because they are responsible........they focus on the science.........they don't sell out to BIG OIL.

Climate Change 2007:

Synthesis Report

Synthesis Report

If you look at the above report, you will see that global average sea level has risen between 1961-1991, along with global average surface temperature. That is dated.........the new data show that sea level continues to rise. Most of this is due to thermal expansion of the oceans:

"By the 2080s, many millions more people than today are projected

to experience floods every year due to sea level rise. The

numbers affected will be largest in the densely populated and

low-lying megadeltas of Asia and Africa while small islands

are especially vulnerable (very high confidence). {WGII 6.4, 6.5,

Table 6.11, SPM}"

What is happening is twofold: 1) thermal expansion due to the greenhouse effect and rising temperatures, 2) melting of both polar ice caps, Greenland, and glaciers.

The end result: sea levels are rising........not uniformly around the globe.........but they are rising.

This is causing massive problems for small island nations.

LINKS TO REASON AND SCIENCE

Links to research on on global warming and climate change:

http://www.realclimate.org/

http://ossfoundation.us/

http://www.skepticalscience.com/

http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/denier-vs-skeptic/

http://www.grist.org/article/series/skeptics/

http://www.whrc.org/resources/online_publi...ic_evidence.htm

http://co2now.org/index.php?option=com_content

Link to investigate the backgrounds of spokespersons on both sides:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SourceWatch

Links to lawsuits against BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA:

Groundbreaking Lawsuit Accuses Big Oil of Conspiracy to Deceive Public About Climate Change

Source: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/3/groun...uses_big_oil_of

Civil Conspiracy Lawsuits Filed Against Climate Change Deniers

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091206/civi...-change-deniers

The Coming Global Warming “Scopes” Trial

Recent Climate Lawsuits Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg

http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/07/glo...rming-in-court/

For Peru's Indians, Lawsuit Against Big Oil Reflects a New Era - Outsiders, NGOs and High-Tech Tools Help Document Firms' Impact

http://patagonia-under-siege.blogspot.com/...gainst-big.html

Sue Big Oil Over Global Warming? Court Tells Katrina Victims, Yes You Can!

Source: http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10002353/s...ms-yes-you-can/

Big Oil Going The Way Of Big Tobacco?

Source: http://bexhuff.com/2008/06/big-oil-going-t...-of-big-tobacco

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/science/earth/24deny.html

First Global Warming Lawsuit Against US Polluters a Success

Source: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/fi...mate-change.php

Courts Are Open for Climate Change Lawsuits against Power Companies

Source: http://www.internationallawoffice.com/News...25-d725987b458d

US rules greenhouse gases 'hazards'

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...3433211121.html

More links:

Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climate-skepti...ies-exxonmobil/

Transition from oil to renewable energy 100 years away, says Exxon Mobil

Oil giant claims ‘no viable alternatives’ will emerge in the next century.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/st...ys-exxon-mobilt

Climate change sceptics and lobbyists put world at risk, says top adviser

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009...cientist-watson

A Climate Deception Revisited: What's Behind the Signatures of 31,478 Skeptical "Scientists"

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090806/clim...ical-scientists

Understanding why climate change means global famine

Source: http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/...-global-famine/

No doubt: The earth is warming

The British Met Office has released world-wide temperature data into the public domain to give evidence that the globe is warming.

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2881

Climate Change Accelerating Beyond Expectations, Say Leading Scientists

New research emphasizes the urgency of large and rapid reductions in global emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide

http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/Releases/?releaseID=1033

News Release : CO2 Emissions Continue Significant Climb

http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=7545&t...3506&ct=162

BIG GOVERNMENT ALREADY EXISTS. There is no conspiracy to create it. Here are just a few examples of global entities that influence us: International Monetary Fund, Bretton Woods, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, World Bank Group, European Union, G-20, G-77, OPEC, United Nations

*The BOLs want you to focus on BIG GOVERNMENT/BIGGER GOVERNMENT/ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT to distract your attention from the real problem: BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA and its monopolistic/centralized control over the energy you purchase and use.

BIG OIL (FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY MAFIA) wants us dependent on their centralized energy platform for the next 100 years. The last thing they want is for us to think about and demand a decentralized energy platform that they can’t control.

CENTRALIZED ENERGY = ECONOMIC SLAVERY, DEPENDENCY on the ENERGY MAFIA, more BIG GOVERNMENT (because problems will escalate), ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION, AND SOCIAL CHAOS

DECENTRALIZED ENERGY = ECONOMIC FREEDOM, LESS GOVERNMENT (because problems will be reduced), CLEAN ENVIRONMENT, AND EMPOWERMENT OF INDIVIDUALS and LOCAL COMMUNITIES

[Orac]

JR, you forgot to include the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction in your list of organisations that received funding from Exxon-Mobil.

If that is true--and BIG OIL does often play both sides of the fence--is clear that the scientists are not being influenced by money. That is because they are responsible........they focus on the science.........they don't sell out to BIG OIL.

...snip...

This is a claim by Exxon Mobil themselves as per the following link;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...nse-exxon-mobil

To be fair it does not say when or how much and could easily been seen as a red herring to establish some slightly greener credentials - equally the claims to have funded MIT, Brookes and Princetown can be discounted as it does not say if the funding was climate specific. However, I cannot find anything that refutes the claim which strikes me as odd.

[tig28]

RISING SEA LEVELS

Way back in the late 60's whilst stationed in Sri Lanka we occasionally visited the Maldives as tourists and for a little diving. I was vaguely aware of concerns that this group of isles would be amongst the first and most affected by the "new" concept of rising sea levels due to global warming. It did not have much impact on me at the time as the crisis was not expected to materialize until towards the end of the century --- and that was a long way in the future.

As the years passed I always maintained an interested watch on this impending disaster and learned of other island nations in a similar predicament -- such as the pacific islands of Tuvalu -- where I learned a sea level rise of only 40 centimeters would make Tuvalu uninhabitable.

My first surprise came 3 years ago when I again visited the Maldives ... I am not sure what I expected to see in relationship to rising sea levels in these islands but .... I was certainly surprised to not be able to discern any change at all !! I have no knowledge of the workings of all this ... but surly the sea should have viably risen ... even a little?? I was led to believe that the Maldives were to be "half under water" last century.

-------------------------------------------

My second surprise came when I watched of an address made by the climate change envoy of Tuvalu to the current Copenhagen conference where he announced:

"I woke up this morning crying, and that's not easy for a grown man to admit," Fry said, choking as he spoke in the plenary crowded with hundreds of delegates who clapped to show their support. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," he said.

Full speech here:

I was also referred to a Tuvalu website which graphically displays the nations plea for international help.

( http://media.adelaidenow.com.au/multimedia...u-perthnow.html )

All this was a surprise to me mainly because I had recently read a report by The Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/) . The POL is apparently a world authority on sea levels and as such is a primary source of sea level data to scientists world wide.

The report states this about Tuvalu ::

SUMMARY:

There is no indication from this data that Tuvalu is suffering from the sea level rising due to global warming. The overwhelming conclusion is that the cessation of strong El Nino conditions will simply cause the sea level to rise back to its normal position.

and

There is no evidence of permanently rising seas that can be matched to the supposed increase in average global

temperature since 1976.

The full report can be viewed here : http://mclean.ch/climate/Sea_Level_Tuvalu.htm

What !! --- no rise in sea level ???? ............... At all ?? .

[JR Texas]

JR, you forgot to include the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction in your list of organisations that received funding from Exxon-Mobil.

If that is true--and BIG OIL does often play both sides of the fence--is clear that the scientists are not being influenced by money. That is because they are responsible........they focus on the science.........they don't sell out to BIG OIL.

...snip...

This is a claim by Exxon Mobil themselves as per the following link;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...nse-exxon-mobil

To be fair it does not say when or how much and could easily been seen as a red herring to establish some slightly greener credentials - equally the claims to have funded MIT, Brookes and Princetown can be discounted as it does not say if the funding was climate specific. However, I cannot find anything that refutes the claim which strikes me as odd.

It really is not that odd if true........as you pointed out, there are many things we don't know:

1) how much money was given to them

2) what was it for

3) when was it given

4) how does the amount compare to the amount they spend trying to disprove what scientists are saying about climate change and global warming (I think I know the answer )

In my own country, BIG OIL (ENERGY MAFIA) plays on both sides of the fence frequently.......we see it in their attempt to control BIG GOVERNMENT, giving money to both the republicans and democrats.

It would not surprise me at all if the ENERGY MAFIA attempted to bribe responsible scientists........hoping they would act irresponsibly. But that did not work!

And that simply speaks to the honesty of the hard working scientists who are trying to understand climate change/global warming.

About sea levels not rising.......on another post........please do some research. The data show CLEARLY that sea levels have risen and it is also clear why it is happening.

But if you are a small island nation (or even a coastal city like New Orleans).......global warming is a major threat because it is causing temperatures in the ocean to rise........and that means more storms.........more intense and dangeous storms.

So,there are actually two threats: 1) flooding, and 2) storms.

[JR Texas]

RISING SEA LEVELS

Way back in the late 60's whilst stationed in Sri Lanka we occasionally visited the Maldives as tourists and for a little diving. I was vaguely aware of concerns that this group of isles would be amongst the first and most affected by the "new" concept of rising sea levels due to global warming. It did not have much impact on me at the time as the crisis was not expected to materialize until towards the end of the century --- and that was a long way in the future.

As the years passed I always maintained an interested watch on this impending disaster and learned of other island nations in a similar predicament -- such as the pacific islands of Tuvalu -- where I learned a sea level rise of only 40 centimeters would make Tuvalu uninhabitable.

My first surprise came 3 years ago when I again visited the Maldives ... I am not sure what I expected to see in relationship to rising sea levels in these islands but .... I was certainly surprised to not be able to discern any change at all !! I have no knowledge of the workings of all this ... but surly the sea should have viably risen ... even a little?? I was led to believe that the Maldives were to be "half under water" last century.

-------------------------------------------

My second surprise came when I watched of an address made by the climate change envoy of Tuvalu to the current Copenhagen conference where he announced:

"I woke up this morning crying, and that's not easy for a grown man to admit," Fry said, choking as he spoke in the plenary crowded with hundreds of delegates who clapped to show their support. "The fate of my country rests in your hands," he said.

Full speech here:

I was also referred to a Tuvalu website which graphically displays the nations plea for international help.

( http://media.adelaidenow.com.au/multimedia...u-perthnow.html )

All this was a surprise to me mainly because I had recently read a report by The Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/) . The POL is apparently a world authority on sea levels and as such is a primary source of sea level data to scientists world wide.

The report states this about Tuvalu ::

SUMMARY:

There is no indication from this data that Tuvalu is suffering from the sea level rising due to global warming. The overwhelming conclusion is that the cessation of strong El Nino conditions will simply cause the sea level to rise back to its normal position.

and

There is no evidence of permanently rising seas that can be matched to the supposed increase in average global

temperature since 1976.

The full report can be viewed here : http://mclean.ch/climate/Sea_Level_Tuvalu.htm

What !! --- no rise in sea level ???? ............... At all ?? .

Why no rise in sea level? Maybe you don't understand or are not reading the scientific literature........really, the National Inquirer Science pages you BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA lobbyists are getting your information from is not that reliable.

It actually would not matter if Tuvalu isn't currently being impacted by a sea level rise......it is not rising uniformly around the globe.

What does matter is that if both poles melt along with Greenland and all of the glaciers worldwide, Tuvalu will be in trouble.

In the meantime, Tuvalu will likey be hit by more storms and more severe storms due to the increase in ocean temperature.

Study: Sea level rises much faster

New estimates of sea level change including the dynamics of the big ice sheets are way higher than the IPCC 2007 estimate.

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2964

[tig28]

Why no rise in sea level? Maybe you don't understand or are not reading the scientific literature........really, the National Inquirer Science pages you BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA lobbyists are getting your information from is not that reliable.

It actually would not matter if Tuvalu isn't currently being impacted by a sea level rise......it is not rising uniformly around the globe.

What does matter is that if both poles melt along with Greenland and all of the glaciers worldwide, Tuvalu will be in trouble.

In the meantime, Tuvalu will likey be hit by more storms and more severe storms due to the increase in ocean temperature.

Study: Sea level rises much faster

New estimates of sea level change including the dynamics of the big ice sheets are way higher than the IPCC 2007 estimate.

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2964

the National Inquirer Science pages you BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA lobbyists are getting your information from is not that reliable.

I shall take the charitable view of that statement ----in that you were not referring to me!! Aside from that --- in a thread filled with endless garbage --- the arrogance of this single post takes some beating.

It seems that in your mind --- it is your opinion and your opinion only --- that can be be correct. Anything which does not agree with that "oh so incredibly intelligent .. master of the universe intellect" is the work of your fancifully described "BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA." Very - very childish!!

Leaving aside the arrogance of that position ---- lets look at the rest of your post.

" Maybe you don't understand or are not reading the scientific literature"

--- Thank you for yet another wise JR assessment ----- you are priceless. If you attempt to insult -- you succeed. This is of little consequence to me as it is obvious that you have not got a clue.

Why don't you read this publication from the POL and give us the benefit of your understandings??

If you don't recognize it --- it is the measurements of sea levels at one of the major islands of Tuvalu for 15 years. Oh ... and JR "up" is /\ this way.

"It actually would not matter if Tuvalu isn't currently being impacted by a sea level rise ...... it is not rising uniformly around the globe. "

For heavens sake don't say that --- this is the entire basis of the Tuvalu "claim" against the developed nations. We are talking many many millions of dollars. Perhaps billions.

Also ... my post was directed to only Tuvalu (note for JR -- Tuvalu) not the whole globe --- that is simply your overactive imagination getting the better of you again!! I don't hold the view that events at one point on the globe automatically apply worldwide -- I'm surprised you seem to.

"In the meantime, Tuvalu will likely be hit by more storms and more severe storms due to the increase in ocean temperature. "

Yep !! That's a given.......... Oh boy!!!....... This rubbish brings to mind advice my wise old granddad gave me :

"Never try to teach a pig to sing....

it's a waste of your time .... and it annoys the pig!!!"